When I started cycling as a kid in school, all they showed on television in South Africa was the Tour de France. When bike racing first entered my imagination it was Miguel Indurain that I idolized. But cycling was a phase, a passing ambition that was soon replaced by the more accepted and relevant school pursuits of rugby and water polo. It was many years of competitive rugby and water polo that eventually became limiting factors when my cycling career had its second genesis in my late twenties.
I began cycling in earnest in when Lance Armstrong rose to ascendancy in the Tour de France. Of course, like many first coming to serious bike riding at that time, Armstrong was my cycling hero - the one I aspired to emulate in a meagre way in my own riding. However, the more I rode and raced, and the more I absorbed about road racing, the more I realised that I was no Lance Armstrong. I’m not speaking about some misguided dream to ride in the professional peloton, but the realisation that I was a different kind of rider. It doesn’t matter how much I dreamt of riding away from opponents in the hills, I never could. After a few bad races I decided to just survive the climbs and ended up surprising my self in the sprint at the end. Equally I had a good ability to grind at the front of the bunch in criteriums and to ride away on my own. The same was true in road races where I found strength on the flats, and in time trialling.
Enough of my adventures at a C grade racer…The point is that I came to aspire towards being a different kind of rider. A classics rider. I looked more towards a guy like Fabian Cancellara. So when I came to choosing a new bike, a Cervelo was the obvious option. My first Cervelo was Soloist Carbon. The geometry was never quite right for me: too low at the front on the 54cm, too long in the top tube on the 56cm. I ended up with an awkwardly fitting 56, and was a another win for the Cervelo marketing machine. It was a great bike, but never quite right for me. I also then developed an irrational hatred of spacers. They made the bike look cluttered, unclean - they were not very “pro”. When I started looking for a new bike in 2007 I began to look away from Cervelo at custom machines and bikes that had more accommodating geometries. I knew that a 54cm Cervelo SLC, SLC-SL, R3 or R3-SL was not going to fit me unless I had a large stack of spacers.
Cancellara’s front end:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/...Cervelo_SLC-SL_logos
SLC-SL the way it is supposed to look:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/...C-SL_FSA_OS-115_stem
Just as I was about to settle on a very expensive custom frame, along came the Cervelo RS.
What is 20mm?
20mm is notion, and then everything. The extra 20mm that the 54cm RS has on its head tube makes the world of difference, not only in the height of the front end of the bicycle, but in the way the rest of the bike is designed. Cervelo added 20mm to the headtube and this resulted in changes to the rest of the geometry including 10mm longer chain stays and increased fork rake. This makes the bike longer overall and the effect on the ride is brilliant: surer handling; no skipping on tight corners during crits; and more confidence on long, technical descents. An added bonus is that the the longer chain stays are better for gear changes and reduce chain rub when the chain is crossed. The curved chainstays visibly work on rough roads, and Sydney has some shockers.
Aero
As a roady, aerodynamics matter less to me than they do to triathletes. I spend most of my time in the bunch. I figure that the aero benefits of the Soloist were negated by my lack of comfort in the drops on the 56cm. If I got a 54cm Soloist, I would only manage to stay in the drops an ugly stack of spacers. I think that comfort, plus some good aero wheels is the key.
Stiffness.
The difference in lateral stiffness between my old SLC and the new RS is like night and day. I never believed that I would be able to tell the difference, but it was immediately apparent as I rode away from my front door for the first time. The frame does not relent at the bottom bracket and the 3T Funda Pro fork works wonders up at the front. The vertical compliance of the bike is also a wonder. As I mentioned, Sydney has some shocking roads and the RS’ curved seat stays make them much more bearable than three SLC. To be fair to the Soloist - which was my first carbon bike - I never felt uncomfortable, but now I realise how much better a carbon frame can be at absorbing bumps. Credit too has to given to the HED Ardennes that complete the bike. The 23mm wide rim allows the tire to better absorb road vibrations at higher PSIs. The Ardennes are an excellent choice with all the stiffness you need, coupled with a weigh-weenie-approved 1385g for the set. HED asserts that the wider rim width is better for aerodynamics that a deeper cross-section, and adds aero spokes for good measure.
Overall.
I couldn’t be happier with my choice of road bike. The comfort, good fit and stiffness make this an excellent racing machine.